this. >> oh, you can. >> oh. >> terrible. >> she gets up. she gets up. that's the important thing. >> she's not going to try that again any time soon. don't try that home. "larry king live" starting right now. >> larry: tonight, rudy giuliani. he saw new york through a terror attack that brought america's biggest city to its knees. how does he think president obama is handling the crisis that confronts america today? he's here to tell us. and then the roman polanski rape case. back before a judge today. the victim wants the charges against him dismissed. we've got all the latest and all next on "larry king live."

>> larry: we begin with the former mayor of new york, rudy giuliani. he sought the republican nomination for the presidency in 2008. lots to talk about. what about, you are not going to run for governor. are you going to run for senate? what's next for you? >> what is next for me is continuing to build my two businesses, giuliani partners and bracewell giuliani. we're involved with a security consulting company. we're doing security in various parts of the world and a worldwide law firm bracewell giuliani. i'm very busy and not the time to leave. too many things going on. >> larry: might you consider it some time down the road? >> yeah, sure. you never know. what i found is that life changes and politics changes. who knows what's going to happen? but right now i'm involved in so many things. we're getting involved in doing security for the olympics and the world cup in brazil. a bunch of other projects like that in other parts of the world. i'm involved with my firm in audit cases. i'm very active and i'm enjoying

myself, which is the most important thing in life, right? >> larry: you're not kidding. let's get to things current. the detroit terror suspect indicted today. liz cheney and some others say he should be classified as an enemy combatant before a military tribunal. you were a prosecutor. what do you think of trying him in the criminal courts? >> i don't think it's a question of trying him so much as the opportunity that was lost. i think the president made a very big mistake in not making him an enemy combatant, because the minute you make him a criminal justice defendant, you cut off the ability to really question him. in fact, as far as i know -- i don't know the inside story here. he was talking until we went out and got him a lawyer. cut him off from talking. you want to talk to this guy for about a month. you want to keep him an enemy combatant for about a month or two to get all the intelligence he's willing to give you because that intelligence could be about other possible attacks on the united states. and i really believe the

president and attorney general holder really should rethink this. they should really rething this rigid commitment to the criminal justice system. after all, this guy came from outside the country. what he was planning was an attack on america. this is a war-like act. he should not be treated like a domestic criminal. >> larry: can you treat someone as a military combatant and then later try them criminally? >> you can do anything you want. the justice department could move him around in all different ways. the reality is in this particular case, he should have been treated as an enemy combatant. after all, the president and the attorney general have authorized military tribunals. now, if you are going to have military tribunals and you're going to try some people in a military tribunal, somebody who comes to the united states with a bomb to blow up an airplane in one of our cities should be treated as a war time criminal, not like a domestic criminal. and that may be an academic dispute for some people, but here's the difference.

if you treat him as a criminal justice defendant, you cannot question him in the same way as you can question him if he's an enemy combatant. and we want to know, i'd like to know everything he knows. i'd like us to have the benefit -- and he sounds like somebody that you could crack pretty easily. sounded like he wanted to talk, and we cut it off. >> larry: what did you make of the president's strong statement yesterday about security measures and the like and tightening them up? >> i think the president has to make a major correction in the way he's dealing with terrorism. i think he has mishandled this situation. first of all, it was ten days too late. i mean, this is something you react to immediately, not ten days later after your vacation. president of the united states, when there is a potential massive attack on this country, which is what this guy was going to do, should have been on top of this immediately, not ten days later, 11 days later, 12 days later. we should have had our response ready. after all, this is not an unexpected act. we're in the age of terrorism.

we don't need ten days to respond or figure out our response. all that does, i believe, is convince our enemies that we're not ready. that we're pondering too much and thinking too much. so there is -- you want to take some time, but this has been an extraordinarily long time given the magnitude of this kind of attack. >> larry: president bush, though, took six days once. >> well, first of all. >> larry: in a similar incident. >> well, six days is less than ten, and the reality is that president bush was criticized for taking what was it, like 20 or 30 minutes in delaying his response to september 11th. and i believe that six days was before the september 11th attack. i think one of the things that i note about the administration that i believe there's time for them to change this. i mean, president kennedy famously, by his own admission, mishandled the bay of pigs early

on in his presidency and learned from it. i hope the president has the whatever leadership qualities or whatever to learn from the mistake that he's made in the way that he's handled this. he delayed too long in responding to it. his response has been too tentative. the reality is their very first descriptions by the administration were entirely inaccurate, including the suggestion that everything worked. which doesn't give people a lot of confidence. so maybe from now on, there will be a quicker response and a more accurate one. >> larry: bush waited six days on the shue bomber. >> that's correct. that's correct. >> larry: you think heads should roll here, rudy? or is it too soon to -- >> that's up to the president to decide. i don't know enough of the internal situation here to tell you that people, you know, deliberately miss things or they mishandled things. it looks like they did. but i can't tell you which ones.

i think the president's got to take the responsibility for his own response, which has been very much delayed and extremely tentative. you know, there's enough time for anybody in yemen who might think that we're going to respond to this to go somewhere else by now. this has been a very long time to deal with this. >> larry: all right. how about since 9/11, we've been talking about both administrations connecting the dots. we still haven't really put it all together, in all honesty, right, rudy? >> we haven't, no. it's clear from both the ft. hood attack and this attack that there's something seriously wrong here. and here i would say this is not in any way a criticism of just this administration. this is an enormously complex thing to do. and we haven't gotten it right yet. we haven't given it enough priority to the correct situations. now, it may seem easier in retrospect to pick them out. you know, it's easier once

somebody is caught with one of these bombs or somebody runs into ft. hood or starts killing people to figure it out. but when you see what was available on both of these people, the guy in ft. hood clearly should have been somebody that should have been thrown out of the army a long time before he ever had access to the base. and this guy should have never been allowed on the airplane. you wonder what the heck's going on that we can't -- that we can't spot these things. >> larry: former mayor of new york, rudy giuliani. we'll talk about sarah palin ahead. (announcer) do you want to give afrin a try? ok. i can breathe through my nose immediately. afrin has made me happy. is that a silly statement? (announcer) afrin. why suffer? to stay on top of my game after 50,

i switched to a complete multivitamin with more. only one a day men's 50+ advantage... has gingko for memp$y and concentration. plus support for heart health. ( crowd roars ) that's a great call. one a day men's.

this was not a hoax. we had searched the house high and low. and -- >> we did this for a show. >> larry: you're swearing that none of that was staged? want to remind you that richard heene, the father who led the whole country to believe that his son was trapped in a runaway balloon, will be here friday night. his first interview since he was sentenced to jail. he says it wasn't a hoax. that's friday night's "larry king live." the guest is mayor rudy giuliani. a study from duke university released today says that the threat posed by radicalized muslim americans has been exaggerated. do you favor profiling? >> well, you know, it depends on how you define profiling. you profile when you make a logical deduction about who the suspect is.

if somebody calls me up and tells me that the person who just committed the crime is a 6'2" blond guy, well then you look for a 6'2" blond guys. and if you get a thousand reports like that, those are the people that you look for. so, of course, you have to profile in the sense that you have to have some criteria for what you're looking for. if, in fact, the major threat that is occurring comes from misguided, perverted muslims, meaning people who are perverting the religion, then there's nothing wrong with putting more attention in that area than some other area. otherwise you're wasting a lot of resources profiling is rationally based orp based on unfair prejudice. >> larry: could that be a delicate line, though? >> it is a delicate line. but if you take away the ability to use rational analysis for determining where the threats

are coming from, you're putting yourself in grave danger. the reality is if, in fact, the threat is 90% coming from one area, then roughly 90% of your attention should be in that area. that isn't prejudice. that's rational, sensible reaction to a set of facts that leads you in that direction. you couldn't solve any crimes unless you do that. >> larry: justice department has decided to try the accused 9/11 master mind khalid shaikh mohammed in new york city. >> terrible -- >> larry: let's listen to what the president said. first, listen to what he said, then i'll have you comment. >> all right. >> i'm absolutely convinced that khalid shaikh mohammed will be subject to the most exacting demands of justice. the american people insist on it and my administration will insist on it. >> larry: rudy, that's your

city. you've tried cases there. they know how to do it in new york. >> they sure do. >> larry: what are you concerned about? >> i think this could be one of the worst mistakes that any president's ever made. >> larry: why? >> well, first of all, he has military tribunals for other terrorists. if you're going to have military tribunals, then they obviously also can provide justice. >> larry: but the crime was committed there. wouldn't you feel that all those people who lost relatives want that man tried in their city at their territory? >> well, actually, larry, most of those people -- not all. you never have all. most of those people would rather see him tried in a military court. the president didn't take their wishes into consideration. there's no question it adds a level of threat to new york. not the only kind of threat new york has. a tremendous burden. the mayor is asking for a significant amount of money to have to deal with this. i had to close down new york when we had similar trials when i was the mayor, and it cost me a lot of time, a lot of attention. and the reality is you're also,

by using this method, cutting yourself off from getting intelligence like he has done with this situation in detroit. so i think this is one of the big mistakes that he's made. and the reality is, you know, both he and the attorney general have already announced that this guy is guilty, and i think one of them has said he's probably going to get executed. so i mean, i don't know what they're talking about in terms of a fair trial. so -- and i don't know what happens if he gets acquitted. the president of the united states can't be saying to the world, we're going to give him a fair trial but he's going to get convicted. if we're doing this for public relations and creating these burdens on ourselves, i don't see why we want to do that. this man organized an attack from outside the united states on the united states. it was an attack very much like pearl harbor, and nobody would have ever thought of prosecuting the people who attacked pearl harbor in a civilian court. president lincoln didn't do that, president roosevelt didn't

do that, president bush didn't do that. i don't know why president obama wants to do that. >> larry: back in 60 seconds. there's new robitussin® to go. in a neat little single dose spoon. liquid medicine already dissolved ready for your body to take in. new robitussin® to go.

pure robitussin® relief... to go. >> larry: back with rudy giuliani. the president is fighting two wars, trying to keep the country safe at home. what kind of message does it send when the former vice president openingly says that he is not seriously fighting the war? do you think it's a good idea what dick cheney did? >> you know, larry, nobody was really concerned about that when everyone criticized president bush day in and day out including democrats calling him all kinds of names when he was trying to prosecute the war in iraq. and the reality is that's just part of the first amendment, part of debate. vice president cheney is entitled to his view. i share some of them. i don't share all of them. my hope is -- and i mean this. i hope that this administration does a midcourse correction much

like president clinton did, which i always thought showed essentially president clinton's practice tickality in terms of being president. i think he's gone way too far to the left, president obama. president clinton had some of those problems early in his administration, he made a midcourse correction and then accomplished a lot of good things. welfare reform, other things like that, criminal justice reform. i hope president obama is in a learning process and we see a change for the good of the country, forget partisan politics. i'd like to see him reverse his decision on the trial in new york. and i'd like to see him treat these people who are trying to attack this country as enemy combatants so that we can get the maximum amount of information out of them. if he make corrections like that, it would show great leadership. >> larry: you're in the security business. what do you make of the newark airport, right next store to you, the breach last sunday. we now learn that cameras were running but they weren't recording. the tsa takes full responsibility. how do they let that happen? >> these things happen and they

shouldn't happen. and we need a lot more concentration on it. and you know, i think maybe that one of the good things that can come out of the situation that just happened in detroit, which thank god didn't involve the loss of life is this can act as a wake-up call for us. we've become too lackadaisical since september 11th. the threat to this country is just as great now as it was then. september 11th is not part of our history yet. it's still part of our present. the same forces that wanted to attack us then idyllical misperceptions that were present then are present now. and we've got to invest a lot of our time and effort in making ourselves secure. and i thing maybe we've become a little too lackadaisical, which may account for not connecting some of the dots, some of these mistakes that are occurring. >> larry: when we come back we'll ask rudy giuliani about, guess what? politics. years from now, how will we look back on today?

as the great recession? or as the recession that made us great? allstate has seen twelve recoveries. but this one's different. because we're different. we realized our things are not as important... as the future we're building with the ones we love. protect yours. put it... in good hands. ♪

get into some politics with rudy giuliani, the former mayor of new york. what do you make of chris dodd bowing out today? >> well, i guess he's -- it sounds to me he's doing that probably for the good of the party since they think they have a stronger candidate. of course, i hope that this gives us an opportunity, meaning the republicans, to pick up a seat in connecticut. i think the opportunity's out there for republicans in this election year are pretty darn good. you see all these democrats resigning, opening up seats. an open seat is always easier to take than an incumbent seat. so who knows what it's going to be like in november, but right

now, as a republican, i'm feeling pretty good about the pickups that we can make this year. >> larry: byron dorgan also will not run. >> yeah, there's another one. i think that may be an example of the president having pushed the agenda a little too far to the left, which is what i was saying before. we'll have to see if the president makes a correction or not. because he's putting a lot of these seats -- it seems to me he's putting them in jeopardy, particularly in the house where you have a lot of democrats sitting in districts that were republican districts up until, you know, the last election or the one before that. >> larry: all right. now your own party. is sarah palin viable? >> sure. >> larry: is she the face of your party now? >> well, gosh, who knows three years before the presidential election who the face of our party is. sarah palin is extremely popular, she's extremely articulate, she's somebody who has run for vice president and she has the right to make her case to the republican party, which will all happen after

2010. but she certainly generates an enormous amount of enthusiasm. larry, i took her to a baseball game last year. judith and i took her to a baseball game at yankee stadium in the bronx, which you know is democratic territory, and she got an absolute great response. everybody wanted to take a -- >> larry: really? >> even the democrats wanted to take pictures with her. >> larry: that's a good sign. >> yeah. >> larry: there's a "new york times" report today that democrat harold ford who has moved to new york, maybe going to run the primary against the senator who replaced hillary clinton. we know that you can come into new york and win, robert kennedy and others. can harold ford be a viable new york candidate? >> i know harold. and see him quite a bit, different things. yeah, you know, new york is a place where we have a history like that. if we were talking about some other state, i would say that's a tough -- that's a tough thing to do. that's a tough thing to come in

and at least immediately run for the senate. you can't run for governor in new york. you have to have a five year residency. you can run for the senate. i guess in new york, anything is possible. >> larry: why didn't you run for governor? >> i wasn't -- i didn't want to leave my business and law firm right now. i took a lot of time off to run for president, a lot of things got disorganized. i put them back together. we're in the middle of and on the verge of doing a lot of exciting things like that thing in brazil. my firm has grown. i started the new york office of bracewell giuliani four years ago. it's gone from three lawyers to 70. we're continuing to grow. so this wasn't the right time to do it. it creates a tremendous amount of disruption in your business life. and i guess, you know, i was enthusiastic about what i was doing. but that doesn't mean i'm not tremendously interested, i'm not going to help republicans to the extent that they want my help and that i'm not going to be involved in all these issues because they're part of me.

>> larry: republicans are constantly accused by the other side of being only negative. tell me something you like about the president. >> well, i like the fact that he dealt with afghanistan in the right way. i think that he had a tough choice to make. i did think he took a little too long in making it, but that may be his decision style. but i support his realization and his acting on his campaign promise to make afghanistan a priority. i respect him as a leader. i think he's got an enormous ability to communicate. i wish he would use it for purposes that i agree with more. this i don't know about him because i don't know barack obama personally. i don't know the balance between ideology and practicality. i worked for ronald reagan, and ronald reagan is often described as a highly ideological, very right wing -- ronald reagan was one of the most practicical

people i ever met. and the understanding that if you can get half a loaf, it's better than getting nothing. if you can get 60% or 70%, you probably won. you rarely get 100%. i hope that barack obama has that same -- that same capacity to readjust himself in having gone what i regard as too far to the left. >> larry: one other thing, rudy, how do you regard your old foe senator clinton as secretary of state? >> i admire the job she's doing. that's a very difficult job. particularly for somebody who has been -- who has run for president, run against barack obama. i think she's doing a, from what i can tell -- now, i don't know the internals of what goes on there. i think she's doing a good job. i've disagreed with hillary clinton quite often but i have tremendous respect for her. >> larry: always good to see you, rudy. we'll see you in new york. >> thank you, larry. >> larry: mayor rudy giuliani,

the former mayor of new york city. the roman polanski case is back in court today. ♪ who knew the store would go and check my credit score ♪ ♪ now all they let me have is this dinosaur ♪ ♪ hello hello hello can anybody hear me? ♪ ♪ i know i know i know i shoulda gone to ♪ ♪ free credit report dot com! ♪ that's where i shoulda gone! coulda got my knowledge on! ♪ ♪ vo: free credit score and report with enrollment in triple advantage. (announcer) we understand. you want to grow internationally. who's not answering. announcer: there's a better way. intuit quickbooks online p9 organizes your business in one place, and helps you stay on top of your business anytime, anywhere. get a 30-day free trial at intuit.com.

already an established film director. everybody knew him. >> he was the roman polanski. >> the future was his. we thought. then everything just collapsed. >> we didn't perceive having intercourse with a 13-year-old girl as against the law. >> the fact of polanski leaving the country seems to have eclipsed what actually happened to the system of justice. >> larry: that was a clip from

the hbo documentary "roman polans polanski." still a wanted man. he pled guilty in august of 1977 to having unlawful sex with a then-13-year-old girl. he was 43 at the time. prosecutor in l.a. dropped all the charges in exchange for a guilty plea. he fled the united states before sentencing, is currently in switzerland under house arrest. polanski's victim samantha geimer, was on this show in 2003. here's what she had to say then about polanski and his possible jail time. watch. in retrospect, would you have been upset at the plea bargain to time served? roman polanski goes free after 45 days? >> everyone was really comfortable with that. that's what we wanted. >> larry: your mother was happy with it? >> oh, yes. i never even asked for him to be put in jail. >> larry: your father was happy about it?

>> i don't know about that. >> larry: you dant talk to him about it? >> no, and the publicity was so traumatic and so horrible that his punishment was secondary to just getting this whole thing to stop. >> larry: others will join us later. we begin with lawrence silver. larry's the attorney for samantha geimer, polanski's rape victim. they want the case against roman polanski dismissed. what happened in court today? >> what happened today was that polanski asked, consistent with what the court of appeal had suggested in their december decision, that he be sentenced in absentia and that would allow a hearing on the allegations, pretty well established, i think, by the documentary, that there was judicial as well as prosecutorial impropriety. >> larry: they're asking to sentence him to a year, three years, whatever, while he's not there. >> to sentence him in absentia. one of the arguments i suspect

that is he's already been sentenced and this judge should merely confirm the sentence that was reached. >> larry: what did this judge rule today? >> he ordered briefing on the issue and set a hearing for january 22nd. >> larry: what does your client want? >> my client would like to have the case over. she's been enduring 32 years of relatively intense press coverage and interference with an effort to put this behind her and get on with her life. after 32 years i think she's entitled to that. >> larry: since she's the victim why isn't he automatically eye que esed to? don't they listen to her? >> apparently not. >> larry: can you make an argument? >> i've argued before the trial court and before the court of appeal that matters should be dismissed. he was supposed to be sentenced to time served. then the judge changed his mind, frankly, because of concerns about how the press would view him.

and then as a result, polanski fled, and it's been just a long period of time for her to endure and her family to endure the pendency of this case. had it been someone else perhaps, it would have been gone and forgotten, probably except by her. but not because of the great publicity that this case seems to engender. >> larry: legally what do you think is going to happen? >> the court of appeals is very strong about the fact that there ought to be a prompt and quick resolution of the matter. the court of appeals was also strong that there ought to be a full hearing, and this plea to a request to be sentenced in absentia should result in a hearing, and then the court can decide what to do as a result of what is clearly judicial impropriety as well as prosecutorial impropriety. >> larry: we'll be joined by debra tate.

we ordered a gift online and we really need to do something with it... i'm just not sure what... what is it? oh just return it. returning gifts is easier than ever with priority mail flat rate boxes from the postal service. if it fits, it ships anywhere in the country for a low flat rate. plus i can pick it up for free. perfect because we have to get that outta this house. c'mon, it's not that... gahh, oh yeah that's gotta go... priority mail flat rate shipping starts at $4.95 only from the postal service. a simpler way to ship and return.

>> larry: joining lawrence silver with us now is debra tate, roman polanski's former sister-in-law. the sister of the late sharon tate. i knew sharon tate. had interviewed her a couple of months before her tragic murder. what would you like to see happen? >> i would like to see this whole thing go away. i think there's been a lot of time that has passed, and we need to bring it to an end. >> larry: you ever talk to roman

polanski? >> i have. i don't have any problems with roman whatsoever. the actions that he took back then have -- has logic that is not -- doesn't necessarily play out by the law in my opinion. there are extenuating circumstances to this whole thing that have to do with legal improprieties that's much bigger to me than the original offense. >> larry: did your ter love him? >> absolutely. >> larry: and he loved her? >> absolutely. >> larry: how was he doing when you spoke to him? >> he was very concerned. he was very humble. he, you know, he thinks that this is a tragic situation. now he sees it a little bit differently perhaps. and that's purely my take on things. he didn't say it verbatim. but i could hear it in his voice. >> larry: is there an age

difference between roman and sharon? >> yes, there was. >> larry: how much? >> ten years. >> larry: that's slight by his standards because he's been married to his current wife for 21 years. he met her when she was 15. >> 16 years old. >> larry: he had a romantic relationship with nastassja kinski when she was 15. >> that's correct. in france i think that's a normal way of life. it's very well known that it's a rite of passage. younger women with older men, older women with younger men. >> larry: do you understand why people might not look favorably upon it? >> i absolutely do understand. i'm a victim's rights advocate. and i deal with a lot of women that have truly been raped. i do understand it completely, but this is just slightly different, and it's not up to me

to -- to bring that to public light. but there are circumstances that make it ever so slightly different than a full rape. >> larry: do you know samantha geimer, larry's client? >> i have never met her, never. >> larry: what do you make of her feelings? >> her feelings i absolutely understand 100%. she's a mother. she's got her own children. this has got to put her at this point in time in a very uncomfortable position at best. and i think that it's very inappropriate on behalf of the l.a. d.a.'s office who i work with often, to pursue this case, especially in this fiscal climate. perhaps there's an end that we can reach without spending 2 million on a trial which is what it would usually cost. >> larry: why do you think they're so intent on this, lawrence, the prosecutors? >> it's hard to figure. the prior prosecutor in the

case, certainly, roger gunson, really wonderful human being was quite understanding of the desire of my client and her family to end this thing even back in 1977. and that intelligence doesn't seem to have been passed on. >> larry: where were you the night sharon was killed? >> i was supposed to be at sharon's house, but via a phone call circumstances changed and i stayed at my mother's home. >> larry: you never get over that, though, do you? >> never. actually i've never -- i get victimized in one way or another other and over and over again. >> larry: did you talk to roman soon after that? >> absolutely. roman and i remain very close for many, many years. we still are. i flew to london and testified in her majesty's high court against conde nast magazine, and

he won that. and then i went to paris and spent some time with him. and it's like time lapsed. >> larry: he has a happy marriage now? >> he's got a wonderful wife, happy marriage, beautiful, bright children. >> larry: we'll be joined by the former county district attorney and the defense attorney. before we go, a program note, richard heene must report to jail by monday morning. he's talking to us on friday night.

>> larry: as we mentioned

samantha geimer was on this show in 2003. i asked her about her feelings towards roman polanski. watch. neither of you feel particularly angry at roman polanski. >> no. not me. not any more. not even then. i mean, it just -- >> larry: no? >> well, yeah, i was angry because he was the cause of the publicity and the publicity was the worst thing that's ever happened to me. the publicity was so terrible that -- and so immediate that it just overshadowed everything that happened that night. >> larry: when you think back, he knew you were 13? >> yes, he did. i was almost 14, but i was 13. >> larry: what do you think happened? why do you think he did this? >> i just think he used to like really young girls. no one else has ever spoken up and said anything. so i have to assume that it's just me, but i think he was just using really bad judgment.

and you know, bent farther than he should go. >> larry: if your sister hadn't overheard the conversation with your boyfriend, would we have ever heard the story? >> no, i would have never told my mom. >> larry: our legal eagles are here. we'll look at the case from opposing sides.

i was just in town for a few days, and i was wondering if i could say hi to the doctor. is he in? he's in copenhagen. oh, well, that's nice. but you can still see him! you just said he was in... copenhagen. come on! that's pretty far. doc, look who's in town. ellen! copenhagen? cool, right? vacation. but still seeing patients. oh. [ whispering ] workaholic. i heard that. she said it. i... [ female announcer ] the new office. see it. live it. share it. on the human network. cisco. for my arthritis, i use

new capzasin quick relief gel. (announcer) starts working on contact and at the nerve level. to block pain for hours. new capzasin, takes the pain out of arthritis. >> larry: lawrence silver, the attorney for samantha geimer and debra tate. we're joined by robin sachs. author of "it happens every day inside the world of a sex crimes d.a." and the famed defense attorney mrk mark geragos. what do you want to have happen here? >> i think as a prosecutor, i want to see that this case get

resolved and get resolved once and for all. and at this point, it's not about looking

what does this say to other rapists who rape young girls? >> they are better off in the '70s than they are today. >> larry: '70s you could get away with it? >> in the '70s, it was a completely different milieu than it is today. >> the law's different now. the same crime under the same circumstances would be a mandatory life sentence. absolutely right. >> in this state recently by initiative, we've passed another victims bill of rights where the victim is to have input through the sentencing. here you have the victim telling them we don't want any more to happen, yet people are still arguing for something else. there's a schizophrenic nature to the public.

>> larry: you're involved with standing up for victims. >> i am involved in standing up for victims. >> larry: but in this case your brother-in-law caused the victim to be a victim. >> to tell you the truth, larry, i believe that at this point in time there are victim on both sides of the fence. there's victims in our legal system that have been taken advantage of on both sides. there are perpetrators. who's wearing the white hats? who's wearing the black hats? it's all mixed these days. >> larry: comment? >> i don't think that polanski is a victim in this situation. the only people victimized has been samantha geimer and the system. he's getting the benefit of a great deal. and luckily for him, we do live in a state where the state actually cares about the victim's input and that is critical. >> you can talk about that all day long except the fact is if half of the allegations -- just half of the allegations are true as to what happened, he is a victim. and the court of appeals spent

70 pages detailing the victimization. >> larry: right now let's check in with anderson cooper. what's up tonight? >> larry, tonight terror charges for the christmas eve bomber. also the details about how quickly this educated and wealthy young man morphed into a violent extremist. tearer in the skies again. f-15 fighters scramble. we'll tell you why. we'll look at continuing questions about what kind of job the tsa is doing to keep us safe. what needs to be fixed. we're keeping them honest tonight. and a battle in the arctic ocean. a small boat in protest takes on a japanese whaling ship. dramatic video. a small boat almost snapped in half. i'll talk to the captain and the crew coming up. >> larry: that's "ac 360." where's my car?

where's my car?!!!! where are you?! arghhh... (announcer) dr. scholl's massaging gel insoles give you outrageous comfort, all-day-guaranteed. woah. it's not too far... (announcer) are you gellin'? dr. scholl's.

>> larry: we're back. larry, has your client been paid damages? >> we have. there was a civil case and a settlement, which is confidential. >> larry: but polanski settled? >> the case was settled. >> larry: what do you know about his health, debra? there are reports he's in ill health? >> he was not in good health at the beginning of this ordeal, but he's bouncing back ever so slightly. he's very concerned, and he's not taking this lightly by any stretch of the imagination. >> larry: would he come back if this got cleared? >> i can't say that. i would like him to come back. he's my -- basically my only family member left on earth other than my daughter. so i would like him to come back, but i doubt it. >> larry: you doubt it, too?

>> i don't think he'd come back. the only reason he wanted this cleared up so he could travel in countries in europe and the like where he wouldn't have a fear of doing what happened here. >> larry: was a deal made at the time, robin, fair? >> the deal at the time -- i can't speak for what would have happened and what the culture in the office was at that time. i wasn't in the office at this time. but that kind of charge probably would not have settled like it did now. if that was the kind of case now, there's a presumption of prison whenever there's a case of penetration. and when there's drug use in someone under 14, you've got a situation where you have a strike under the california three strikes law and a lot of bargaining chips on the prosecution side. so there wouldn't be a reason to give a deal like that unless the victim wasn't going to cooperate. >> it wasn't highly unusual. given everything that surrounded the date time, doug dalton

worked out, i thought, a favorable deal, but it certainly wasn't off the charts. >> larry: what is the culture in that office now? >> in terms of the district attorney's office? >> larry: yeah. >> i don't have a clue. >> that's what i just said is that it would be a prison sentence very likely in the office now because it would have been a life crime. if someone was facing 25 years to life man da torely, a three-year sentence wouldn't have been unusual. >> larry: the victim wouldn't have mattered to you? >> the victim has a right and lass a say, but the victim at the time of prosecution at the time was cooperative. so we would have to assume at the time of prosecution now she would about. >> larry: who in the populous is most upset at the idea of a polanski getting some sort of deal? is there still a large movement out there. >> evidently that there's a very large movement. i catch a lot of for taking the position that i take.

people weren't around at that time. and i was. i do know the details and the circumstances which i'm not an attorney so i'm not on that playing field. but i do believe that there were exceptions that a fair court should take into consideration, and even as a victim's right advocate, i'm not necessarily in line with the current three strikes laws the way they are, and so on and so forth. i think that we're definitely overpenalized in the state of california, and we need to recheck things. prison is -- incarceration is the number one business in the state of california now. >> larry: robin, you want to comment on that. >>? terms of the laws across the state, california is on the lesser side of seriousness when it comes to sexual assault crimes. this crime is still not a registered sex offense where all over the country it would be a registered sex offense. >> larry: not a registered sex offense. >> it is not. in comparative law from state to

state, california is pretty weak in the sex crimes area. >> that's why we've got the largest prison population in the world. it's nonsense. we've got federal judges ordering the state to free 47,000 people. >> but sex crimes. i'm talking about sex crimes. >> larry: thank you all very much. thanks, larry. by the way, tune in for our exclusive interview with richard heene friday night. his homemade balloon will be here, too. i'm not kidding. what i can imagine is "ac 360" and anderson cooper. >> the making of a terrorist. with charges leveled against the alleged christmas bomber, we have new information, surprising stuff about how quickly top officials believe he was turned into a violent extremist. al qaeda's new methods of recruitment and who they're trying to reach. we take a look at what is and isn't working. airport security. you've probably been patted down, but that's not wo